Agenda item

This report provides an analysis of the performance data and trends for an agreed set of measures relating to looked after children on behalf of the Corporate Parenting Advisory Committee. This will include updates on performance of schools and health and education performance data for looked after children.

The Senior Performance Officer ran through the report. The main points are summarised below.

· There were 334 Children in Care at the end of the first quarter. This was the same number as June.

· There were 26 Unaccompanied Asylum Seekers (UAS), this figure increased slightly but the Senior Performance Officer commented the figure was steady overall.

· The ‘Children Coming into Care Aged Three and Under’ category was at 42. The Senior Performance Officer commented that this was slightly up on March, but down on levels in 2022-23.

 · The number of ‘Families Under Acute Stress’ as a reason for coming into care had fallen to 6% this year. However, the numbers for ‘Abuse and Neglect’ as a reason for coming into care were much higher at 60%.

· As of September, 77% of Looked After Children under 16 had an up-to[1]date care plan. · Of the 116 Children in Care aged 16 and 17 years, 67% had an up-to-date pathway plan.

· The number of Personal Education Plans (PEP) that were up to date was 95%

· Eight percent of children had three or more moves with the past two years. The Senior Performance Officer explained that this was down on the previous period which had the category at 10%.

 · Children under 16 who had been in care for at least 2.5 years and were in the same placement for at least two years was now at 57%.

 · The number of up-to-date health visits was 94% and the number of those in care with up-to-date dental visits was 79 %. The Senior Performance Officer commented that this was below expected figures.

· All care leavers under 21 have an allocated personal advisor. Ninety five percent were counted as ‘in touch’ with the service.

· Those in Education, Employment and Training (EET) were divided into two cohorts. Forty eight percent of the older cohort was in EET and 52% of 17 and 18-year-olds are now in education, employment, or training.

 · Those in suitable accommodation was 95%.

· There had been 142 EHCP requests, which had been a similar rate to last year. Twenty eight percent already had an EHCP.

 · Virtual School progress - the annual achievement figures were still to be released, the Senior Performance Officer stated that there was an update planned for future meetings.

 · Twenty percent of the current Youth Justice cohort are also Children in Care, 13% are currently ‘Children In Need’ and 4% had an active Child Protection Plan. Ninety eight percent had an Asset Plus plan. The floor was opened to questions. A question was raised by the panel about the number of young people who had an EHCP and how many were waiting for them. The Senior Performance Officer replied that they had 2,086 active plans, 146 were being assessed for a plan and so far, this year the team had issued 316 EHCP plans. Another question was asked as to how long on average Looked After young people are having to wait for their EHCP.

The Senior Performance Officer replied that 98% are published within the 20-week statutory time scale. Discussion turned to the Virtual School, and it was noted by the Committee that the results were very good last year. A question was asked about how this was achieved and if the results were similar to other boroughs. The Senior Performance Officer responded that the results had been compared with ten London boroughs with similar demographics. The Head of Virtual School also responded that the effort had been a joint one between The Virtual School, SEND and Children’s Services. This way of working with different services ensured the team had a holistic view of the pupil and this had contributed to its success.

The Director of Children’s Services commented that overall, performance was consistently good with her team, however the areas which need to be improved were also consistent. Pathway plans were still an issue. She also commented that the EHCPs’ performance had been very good and was in the highest quartile in the country. The Head of Young Adults Services then pointed out that in some areas of the service, they were achieving 80% of their pathway plans- and were working with other services to get percentages up. She said that improvement should be seen soon.

The Chair asked the Senior Performance Officer about the patterns and trends that were seen in the ‘Abuse and Neglect’ category. She also wanted an understanding of the trends and patterns that the team of doctors had seen. Dr Sheikh responded that there was a multitude of factors that led to a child coming into care. In some cases, it was abuse and neglect; in others it was an emerging disability. Dr Sender added that there were often elements of early interventions and mental health issues within the child’s background – leading to an accumulation of very negative events. He added that categories for data are important to ensure that the service was fit for purpose however, he felt it significant to outline that whilst neurodiversity may not be a disability, it was still something they were seeing more of in terms of children coming into care. Designated Doctor added that patterns of behaviour were being seen in older children already in care that could be attributed to neurodiversity. The Director of Children’s Services commented that Dr Sender was correct about the Page 3 categories. She added that mental health, substance abuse, disability and learning disabilities were compounded by the cost-of-living crisis and by poor housing, causing stress in families.

The team were now seeing emotional stress caused by financial issues. She added that neurodiversity was random in the community but not a reason that children go into care. She also added that poverty had increased in every area. Discussion then turned to the high number of care leavers that Haringey looked after, and the impact on the rest of the services in terms of interventions, as well as how the Young Adult Service dealt with such a high case load. The Head of Young Adult Services explained that her team had adopted a ‘pod’ model. This supported young people in a small team of staff with different specialisms. The team supported young people for up to nine years, and the pods worked well. She added that the Young Adults Services was a very stable team with a permanent workforce, so a significant investment and knowledge remains within the team.

However, the complexity of issues were increasing. Children were coming later into care – often without the assessments needed. She added that her team had seen an increase in severe mental health issues in young adults and that they were working together with Adult Services to ensure that the cohort were being looked after. Another question was raised about the numbers for those in Education, Employment or Training (EET). There was a request for more information into the figures – namely how many were in each category -employment, claiming benefits, education, or training. Also, more information was requested on the offer for EET, where the gaps were, and what a potential future offer could look like. The Chair highlighted that this should link up with the issues facing the older cohort as discussed previously. ACTION The Assistant Director for Safeguarding and Social Care stated that a new project had been initiated in her team around care leavers. A presentation would be ready for a full update to the Committee in time for the next meeting in January. The Chair requested that this be added to the agenda for the next meeting. ACTION.